This may be starting to sound like a broken record, but I'm very impressed by your work also. The B&W ones (especially the street scenes with people) are *very* powerful, and couldn't be better executed.

Marcin, unlike Sebastion I know I'm not qualified . Truly impressive work! Reminds me of an english photographer from the sixties, Brandt was his name but can't remember his first name. Same moody, contrasty, b&W work, mixed with a dash of whimsy. Love it!Bob Munro.

Marcin, unlike Sebastion I know I'm not qualified . Truly impressive work! Reminds me of an english photographer from the sixties, Brandt was his name but can't remember his first name. Same moody, contrasty, b&W work, mixed with a dash of whimsy. Love it!Bob Munro.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=57156\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have to say I like Marcin's work much better than I ever liked Bill Brandt's, which always seemed carelessly too contrasty. Marcin's is dark, but beautifully controlled and well-seen. And the photos of children are so natural, honest, and unposed that they express a great deal about childhood.

Marcin: I agree with the above commenters that your work is very well executed. As I have extensively researched historic street photography, I have the unfortunate feeling that I've essentially seen most of your photos before. Perhaps you were born about 80 years too late. In the historic words of Harper's Art Director Alexy Brodovitch in the 1940's, "If you look through the viewfinder and see a photo you've seen before, don't take it!" This is, of course, a general problem. The history of Modernism has conditioned us, as consumers of art, to look for novelty. So each of us as photographers may choose to confront the issue of novelty in different ways. One can say 'I am content to work within a time honored tradition and satisfy myself and others for whom the re-execution of a historic stance is not an issue'. Or, one can say, 'I will try to find a new niche, even if it means artificially sacrificing some of the traditional values that I might otherwise prefer to maintain.' This is the (unfortunate, in my view) posture that many Post-Modernist artists adopt. Or, one can take the the unsure and difficult task of finding a way to build on and yet transcend or at least elevate from what has gone before. The latter approach requires an energetic eye, obsessive persistence, and savage editing and, with your innate talent, I would love to see what you could do under these terms.

I have the unfortunate feeling that I've essentially seen most of your photos before. In the historic words of Harper's Art Director Alexy Brodovitch in the 1940's, "If you look through the viewfinder and see a photo you've seen before, don't take it!"[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=58301\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I respectfully suggest that anyone who feels this way about photography should really just give it up and find a new hobby, because all of the shots one can think of have most likely been 'done before,' if one paints with a brush as wide as you choose to use. And those who choose to give gallery displays of experimental photography often end up with collections of absolutely dreadful stuff that only someone trying hard out of an avant-garde sensibility could claim to enjoy. The photographs linked to, on the other hand, are beautiful and well-crafted, even if they may strike you as derivative. Day to day life is often quite deriviative, so the subjects we are exposed to are bound to be somewhat the same; even the masters photographed the same scenes that their predecessors famously photographed, yet each was a different moment and a different image.

The photographs are beautiful and atmospheric--complaining that they will not redefine the genre is a rather snobbish quibble.

I respectfully suggest that anyone who feels this way about photography should really just give it up and find a new hobby,.

And those who choose to give gallery displays of experimental photography often end up with collections of absolutely dreadful stuff that only someone trying hard out of an avant-garde sensibility could claim to enjoy.

The photographs are beautiful and atmospheric--complaining that they will not redefine the genre is a rather snobbish quibble.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=58362\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Point 1, in the quote: But, this is the challenge for us all. (but perhaps only if one regards photography as more than "a hobby")

Point 2: I agree about the dreadfulness of much "experimental" photography.

Point 3: I agree that the photographs are all that you say. The issue for us all is, however, is that enough? For some, yes. For others, no.

"Point 3: I agree that the photographs are all that you say. The issue for us all is, however, is that enough? For some, yes. For others, no."

For me "yes". I could care less if anyone else captured an image similar to Marcins. These are very nice images, well exposed, nicely composed and they are not dreadfully depressing shots. Bravo, Marcin!